Here’s a puzzler for you. Suppose you lived in a world that was identical to this one except for one key difference. In this other world, there is a magical button you could push that would spur economic growth to 10%, bring the country to full employment, and, for good measure, eliminate the federal deficit.
If such a world were our world, is there really any question that Barack Obama would push that button?
Well, according to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and the Tea Party denizens, Obama is deliberately destroying the American economy in order to pave the way for a socialist utopia. In that world, our pinko prez would defiantly leave the button unpushed as he rewired the economy with something redder. Tea Partiers insist that Obama has walled off the button behind an electric fence, and that he’ll eagerly zap anyone who tries to get near it.
Yet in fact, people of both parties continue to act as if we live in Button World. Leftists insist that George W. Bush broke the button on his way out of town, much the way petulant Clinton staffers peeled off the Ws on all the White House keyboards.
Both groups are comprised almost entirely of idiots.
As I bravely announced on this very blog with Stallionic Axiom #1, the economy of the United States is not a product of the government of the United States. If it were, and Obama could push the Fix It Button and solidify his own increasingly slim chances for reelection, he would push it in a heartbeat. And those who blame Bush for all of this cannot credibly cite a single one of Bush’s policies that threw us into this ditch.
“Oh, no, Stallion? What about his tax cuts for the rich? And trillions of dollars for unnecessary wars? Huh? HUH?!!”
Well, what about them? Tax cuts do many things, but one thing they don’t do is slow economic growth. You can argue that tax cuts are responsible for our deficits – which isn’t nearly as clear cut a proposition as the Bush haters believe – but people of both parties are confusing deficits with a bad economy. Remember our pal Ronald Reagan? Tax-cutting Ronald Reagan? Master of record deficits concurrent with record economic growth?
Deficits and a bad economy are two very, very different things.
For instance, how can you possibly make the case that a trillion dollars spent by the government on defense destroys the economy, but a trillion dollars of government spending crammed into a “stimulus package” is the way to save the economy? Anyone remember a little thing called “World War II?” From what I hear, it was a very expensive war. Cost a lot of scratch. It resulted in gargantuan deficits. It also finally brought an end to the Great Depression.
The Right is forgetting that, too. All the Tea Party is doing is screaming about record spending – without providing any workable blueprint to tame it. But even if they were to tame it, the austerity measures required would significantly add to unemployment, not decrease it. We would likely see slower economic growth or more recession and more pain. How popular would the Republicans really be if they succeeded in balancing the budget at the cost of a 15% or higher unemployment rate?
Here’s the skinny, folks. People are partisan, and too many of them look at the world through partisan lenses, refusing to concede any integrity in their opponents and looking to blame them for everything from hay fever and stretch marks. But the reality is that the big, bad, cruel world isn’t remotely partisan. This period of economic distress will end according to the timetable set by factors that won’t synchronize themselves conveniently to coincide with the next election. Bush couldn’t have done this if he’d tried, and Obama, despite all his flailing, can’t fix it, either. So you can push the button all you want, but the green light and the “walk” sign aren’t going to come on any faster.
Comments are closed.